| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire) (Con): Could I ask the Leader of the House and the self-proclaimed president of the court of public opinion whether when the Chancellor of the Exchequer addresses the House on 31 March he will talk about the old Labour solution to excessive pensions, and say that in the Budget he will introduce a 98 per cent. tax on anything above £300,000 ?
Ms Harman: I have told the House that the Budget will be on 22 April and that there will be a full day’s debate on the Floor of the House on the economy, led by the Chancellor. No doubt the hon. Gentleman can make his suggestion then.
Mr. Michael Clapham (Barnsley, West and Penistone) (Lab): May I draw my right hon. and learned Friend’s attention to early-day motion 1020, which is in my name?
[ That this House is alarmed and concerned to learn from the Information Commissioner's report that the blacklisting of trade union members is widespread in the construction industry; condemns the major construction contractors who subscribed to the Consulting Association and also provided it with information about workers and employees; notes that many of the companies who donated to the Consulting Association are currently engaged on publicly-procured work projects worth billions of pounds; considers that there may be legal implications where for example an employee or worker believes they were dismissed because they were on the list and requests that the Information Commissioner gives a reasonable time for people to make the appropriate checks; and calls on the Government to enact immediately legislation to prohibit the compilation of a blacklist containing the details of workers and employees with a view to them being used by employers or employment agencies to discriminate in relation to employment and to make it a criminal offence for an employer to commission such information. ]
The early-day motion expresses concern about the fact that the Information Commissioner’s report showed that there was blacklisting in the construction industry. We thought that the practice had come to an end some time ago. My right hon. and learned Friend will recall that section 3 of the Employment Relations Act 1999 made provision for
“regulations prohibiting the compilation of lists”,
and made it a criminal offence for construction or other companies to make such information available. Will she raise with Justice Ministers the need to bring forward regulations under section 3, and will she consider whether the Information Commissioner should give people whose names are likely to be on such a list more time to check whether that is so, because of the legal implications? Any person who thinks that they have lost their job as a result of discrimination because their name was on such a list will have a claim for unfair dismissal, so the Information Commissioner should give much more time for people to check the list. Does she also agree—
Mr. Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman should apply for an Adjournment debate on the subject.
Hon. Members: He’s just had one!
Ms Harman: I congratulate my hon. Friend, who has indeed held an Adjournment debate on this important issue, and I congratulate the Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians and The Guardian, whose work led to an investigation. I thank the Information Commissioner for the work that he has done, which has effectively stopped the company concerned from operating in the way that it did. No trade union health and safety representative should find that, as a result of speaking up on behalf of their colleagues, they are on a blacklist and are never able to work again. The Government are totally opposed to that, and want to make sure that there is most effective enforcement when that happens. The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 introduced extra, tougher penalties for those who misuse information in such a way. The trade union—UCATT—the Information Commissioner and the Government have to work together to make sure that people have the right to work, and that such scurrilous activity is ended. I thank my hon. Friend for the role that he has played in the matter.
Richard Younger-Ross (Teignbridge) (LD): Considering that there has to be a cap on the travel expenditure of Select Committees of this House, but that for at least three of those Committees travel is essential to the proper evaluation of Government policy, could we have a debate on the Liaison Committee’s decision to make a 30 per cent. cut across the board on all future travel this year?
Ms Harman: It is for the Liaison Committee to make those proposals; I am not sure that it is a matter for the Government. I will consider the issue and write to the hon. Gentleman. Obviously, it is important that Select Committees travel in the way that they need to, but that they keep a close eye on the amount of money being spent.
Martin Salter (Reading, West) (Lab): Will my right hon. and learned Friend join me in praising the work of the UK Youth Parliament in providing young people with the opportunity to learn about, and engage in, the political process? Does she share my disappointment that a handful of Tory backwoodsmen have shamefully blocked the motion that would allow the UK Youth Parliament and its young people to have their annual debate on the Floor of this House? When will the House have an opportunity to resolve the matter, to defeat Cameron’s cavemen, and to open the doors of this place to the next generation of citizens?
Mr. Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman knows the traditions of this House. A right hon. Member has been referred to by his surname, and that is not acceptable.
Sir Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield) (Con): Apologise! Withdraw!
Mr. Speaker: It is all right; it is withdrawn. [Interruption.] It is, yes.
Ms Harman:
The motion about the UK Youth Parliament is on the Order Paper for debate today. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Reading, West (Martin Salter): we want to encourage young
people to see democracy as important, and to see the House of Commons as relevant to their lives and the future. It is perverse for us not to let young people use the Chamber when we are not using it, at a weekend or when the House is in recess. It is perverse for us to say that the doors should remain closed and locked, and that those young people should remain outside them.
Mr. Peter Lilley (Hitchin and Harpenden) (Con): May we have a debate about the dramatically revised estimates by the Government of the costs and benefits of the Climate Change Act 2008, which were sneaked out this week, even though the changes are greater than the cost of bailing out several failed banks? The Leader of the House will remember that the Government were forced to revise their original figures, when I pointed out that they showed that the potential costs were twice the maximum benefits—the first time that the Government have ever urged us to do something which, on their own figures, would make matters worse. As so often on climate change, where the facts are out of line with the theory, they change the facts, and after five months of revision, the figures have emerged from the massage parlour with the costs doubled to £400 billion, but to ensure that this time the benefits are in excess, the Government have increased their estimate of the benefits by a factor of 10, from £100 billion to £1 trillion. May we have a debate about such a flaky figure, which only promotes scepticism about the whole issue of climate change?
Ms Harman: On the detailed figures, I suggest that the right hon. Gentleman writes to my right hon. Friend Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change. As for generating scepticism about the climate change agenda, that is the opposite of what we are determined to do. We are determined to make sure that we have a much greener economy for the future, that we use green technology, and that we help people insulate their homes, reduce their fuel bills and save money. We are taking action to tackle climate change across a range of Departments. If the right hon. Gentleman is concerned about the estimates, I suggest that he writes to the Secretary of State.
Joan Ryan (Enfield, North) (Lab): My right hon. and learned Friend will know of the worsening situation in Sri Lanka and the fact that thousands are losing their lives. We have referred to that in the Chamber as a crisis and a catastrophe, and we are running out of words with which to describe the situation. This week, the International Crisis Group described what is happening to the Tamil community as annihilation. Will my right hon. and learned Friend ask the Foreign Secretary to come to the House and give us an urgent statement on the situation?
Ms Harman: Earlier this year, we had a debate in the Chamber about Sri Lanka. My right hon. Friend is right—the situation remains very grave, and we remain concerned about it. Foreign Office Ministers raised it at the Commonwealth meeting, and we continue to work with the international community to press for a democratic resolution to the problem in Sri Lanka.
Mr. Paul Goodman (Wycombe) (Con):
I return to the preventing violent extremism pathfinder fund, which I raised yesterday on a point of order and my hon. Friend the Member for Rutland and Melton (Alan Duncan)
raised today from the Front Bench. I have in my hands details of where every single penny from the fund went last year, which were placed in the Library. The Department for Communities and Local Government is refusing to place in the Library the equivalent details for this year. It must follow either, as was suggested to me yesterday by the Secretary of State’s private office, that the Department no longer holds details of the fund, in which case there is no guarantee that money is not falling into the hands of extremists and violent extremists, or that it is refusing to put the information in the Library, which is a discourtesy to Members in all parts of the House and involves withholding information that the public have a right to know. Will the Leader of the House use her good offices to get the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to make a statement from the Dispatch Box about the matter, which is of exceptional seriousness?
Ms Harman: There is no intention to withhold any information about public money being spent. We are proud of the Prevent programme, which is designed to combat extremism. I suggest that I write to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and ask her to meet the hon. Gentleman in order to resolve the issue amicably. I look to hon. Members to support the idea that Government take a role and take responsibility—
Mr. Goodman: Where is the money going?
Mr. Speaker: Order. When the hon. Gentleman asks for a reply from the Leader of the House, he should calm down and listen. It may not be to his liking, but he must calm down.
Ms Harman: It is right that the Government should put into the hands of local authorities funds so that they can work with community groups in their area to help divert young people from extremism and to support community organisations that are trying to tackle extremism. I deplore the idea of some sort of hue and cry to smear this important programme. If the Opposition want information, the Secretary of State will give them the relevant information and ask for their support for the programme in their areas.
Mr. Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley) (Lab): We are going through a major crisis in the media. The BBC may end up with a monopoly. Surely we believe in true competition. What will we do to ensure that ITV survives? I cannot understand why we had an announcement that product placement would not go ahead. That would have provided the much-needed funding to ensure that ITV will be there to compete against the BBC. Also, local and regional newspapers and local radio are in dire straits. What can we do to ensure that they survive? May we have a topical debate on the subject? Also, I am still waiting for a debate on the future of pensioner travel on trains and young people’s bus passes.
Ms Harman:
My hon. Friend is right. I am still looking for an opportunity to debate a range of issues affecting older people, of which concessionary travel is one. On the BBC, ITV and regional media, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform are working
through their Digital Britain programme. Because a number of hon. Members have raised the question, in particular about regional news coverage, we might look for a topical debate on that.
Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove) (LD): Will the Leader of the House look at early-day motion 1044, which records the concerns of right hon. and hon. Members about the decision of Guardian Media Group to cut its local press in the north-west?
[That this House notes with regret and concern the decision by the Guardian Media Group to announce further job losses at the Manchester Evening News and within its weekly newspaper group; believes that the proposed cuts in editorial, advertising, distribution and information technology can only be damaging to the future prospects of the titles concerned; recognises that many people have worked extremely hard over the years to build these newspapers up; further believes that local newspapers have an absolutely central role at the heart of local communities; recognises an unwelcome trend to centralise their services and people; deplores the move to close down all of the individual weekly newspaper offices which currently serve the Greater Manchester conurbation; understands that this could be the first time in its proud history that the Manchester Evening News implements compulsory redundancies; upholds strongly the values of quality, independent journalism relevant to local communities; further believes that the founding fathers of the Guardian, particularly CP Scott, would be appalled and saddened by these developments; and calls on Guardian Media Group to rethink its proposals.]
The motion is supported by the hon. Member for Stockport (Ann Coffey) and my hon. Friend the Member for Cheadle (Mark Hunter), with the Stockport Express a particular victim of the cuts. That newspaper will in future be produced not in Stockport, but in Manchester, and the journalist posts are to be halved. That is characteristic of the crisis in the local and regional media, which the hon. Member for Chorley (Mr. Hoyle) raised a moment ago. Can the Leader of the House find time for the House to discuss early-day motion 1044 and the serious matters with which it deals? Will she take particular note that Guardian Media Group has instructed journalists on those papers not to publish reports of the redundancies in their own newspapers?
Ms Harman: Regional newspapers are very important indeed. Local and regional newspapers are trusted to provide useful information for people locally—yes, including the South London Press. Like Guardian Media Group, they have been hit by a change in the way in which people get information, with more people getting information over the internet, and by a fall in business advertising. The matter has been raised with me by my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport (Ann Coffey). It is important that the local and regional media do not jump the gun, diminish their capacity, and close down important newspaper titles which are well respected and very important in local areas. If they have immediate cash-flow problems, they know that they can go to HMRC and defer their taxes. The Government can provide other help. We do not want them to make short-term decisions that result in the long-term loss of important local news media.
Anne Moffat (East Lothian) (Lab): Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the National Union of Labour and Socialist Clubs is meeting this weekend for its annual conference? That is timely, because of the tax on beer that is affecting our pubs, clubs and communities throughout the country. May we have a debate on the matter?
Ms Harman: The closure of pubs and fewer people going to clubs is a cause for concern. It is happening not only in this country, but around Europe, where similar patterns can be seen. I suggest that my hon. Friend looks for an opportunity to debate the matter on the Adjournment.
Sir Nicholas Winterton: I fully support the views expressed by the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Andrew Stunell). There is a crisis in local radio and local newspapers. Last week, inadvertently, I associated Silk FM with Guardian Media Group, which was inaccurate. I had been ill-informed, and I have apologised to Guardian Media Group. This week, Guardian Media Group announced the closure of all its local newspaper offices in Wilmslow, Accrington, Salford and Macclesfield, making a very large number of journalists redundant and taking local news away from an area where that newspaper has been printed for 198 years. That shows the seriousness of the issue. May we have a debate in this place not only so the Government can say from the Dispatch Box what they might do—as the right hon. and learned Lady has—but so we can have the opportunity to express our concern about local newspapers and local radio?
Ms Harman: The hon. Gentleman has added to the important points that have been made, and I will consider where we might find an opportunity for a debate.
Sir Patrick Cormack: A topical debate?
Ms Harman: Possibly a topical debate.
Derek Twigg (Halton) (Lab): In 2007, I had the privilege of going to Afghanistan during the Royal Anglian Regiment’s operational tour. I was also at Pirbright barracks when one of its companies returned from tour. It is truly a great regiment, which has shown outstanding bravery and professionalism over the years. So I was appalled at the demonstration in Luton this week; we will not, of course, see those same demonstrators protesting about the many thousands of Muslims who have been killed by the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Do not such demonstrations only give succour to the racists and bigots out there who are anti-Muslim?
Ms Harman: I very much associate myself with the points that my hon. Friend has made. I am sure that everyone on both sides of the House agrees with those points and the way in which he made them.
Mr. Andrew Tyrie (Chichester) (Con): Nearly two years ago, as part of the campaign for the deputy leadership of the Labour party, the right hon. and learned Lady said that we need to be
“absolutely certain we don’t have a situation where we are complicit in torture”.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |